10% of the way into the season......

[diavolos]

and i second the small market owner. this is exactly how the ricketts are acting, like they own the k.c. royals.

 

[beckdawg]

the only way we'll get change is by convincing people to stop going to games, stop watching games, stop listening to games, stop following games on the internet, until they start trying to win.

How'd that go for the Royals over the past 20 years or the Mets the past 10 if you prefer a larger market team? Things get better when the front office drafts well and compliments that with quality additions via trade and FA. If you spend without the drafts behind you end up with the cubs after the Soriano spending spree. Conversely, if you draft well/stockpile picks and don't add players via trade/FA you often end up just bad enough where you end up trading off assets like Beltran with the Royals because you're not competing with him.

Some will use the Cardinals as an example of a team that doesn't need to draft high to acquire quality players. They also are an example of a team that hasn't had to spend in FA to acquire players because instead they've traded well. They brought in McGwire, Edmonds, Rolen and Holliday all via trades and they have largely been the biggest core pieces other than Pujols over their run the last decade or so. The farm system when Theo was hired was considered average at best and that's when Jackson and Vitters were thought to be top tier prospects. So, personally I can forgive taking a couple of years to rebuild that.

What I want to see now is for them to start using some of their highly regarded farm system to add pieces via trade. It doesn't have to be Baez + others for Price. I was a proponent of adding Brett Gardner before they signed him long term. Denard Span might be another worthwhile player to add if he becomes available. Basically players who could be nice compliments to Bryant and Baez when they come up. If there's one area of disappointment with their sell off of players it's that many of them are quite far away from the majors and they've not gotten much in the way of players ready for the MLB. We're talking about Wood, Strop, Arrieta and Grimm being the MLB ready talent.

 

[Boobaby1]

How'd that go for the Royals over the past 20 years or the Mets the past 10 if you prefer a larger market team? Things get better when the front office drafts well and compliments that with quality additions via trade and FA. If you spend without the drafts behind you end up with the cubs after the Soriano spending spree. Conversely, if you draft well/stockpile picks and don't add players via trade/FA you often end up just bad enough where you end up trading off assets like Beltran with the Royals because you're not competing with him.

Some will use the Cardinals as an example of a team that doesn't need to draft high to acquire quality players. They also are an example of a team that hasn't had to spend in FA to acquire players because instead they've traded well. They brought in McGwire, Edmonds, Rolen and Holliday all via trades and they have largely been the biggest core pieces other than Pujols over their run the last decade or so. The farm system when Theo was hired was considered average at best and that's when Jackson and Vitters were thought to be top tier prospects. So, personally I can forgive taking a couple of years to rebuild that.

What I want to see now is for them to start using some of their highly regarded farm system to add pieces via trade. It doesn't have to be Baez + others for Price. I was a proponent of adding Brett Gardner before they signed him long term. Denard Span might be another worthwhile player to add if he becomes available. Basically players who could be nice compliments to Bryant and Baez when they come up. If there's one area of disappointment with their sell off of players it's that many of them are quite far away from the majors and they've not gotten much in the way of players ready for the MLB. We're talking about Wood, Strop, Arrieta and Grimm being the MLB ready talent.

The Cardinals also never just sat on their thumbs waiting for things to happen or for the core to arrive. Sure they traded for the aforementioned players and those were great trades much like Hendry's trades were. But since the McGwire days, they were adding players like Reggie Sanders, Larry Walker, Troy Glaus, Tino Martinez, Rafael Furcal, Fernando Vina, Chris Carpenter, Carlos Beltran and a slew of others.

Bill DeWitt (Owner of the Cardinals) said that he would spend on the team to stay competitive and then also focus on the farm. It obviously has worked out.

They weren't riding on the hopes of UI and outfielders to field a team. They had bona fide names more often than not. The Cubs haven't shown the ability to go after anyone, and I am sick of hearing that they will do it someday when the time comes, and when all the ducks are in a pretty little row. Is there really a time when fielding a quality team gets put on the back burner, year, after year, after year?

And before anyone has an inkling of this thought, spare me the re-build blah, blah, blah, blah, blah! :yep:

 

[beckdawg]

The Cardinals also never just sat on their thumbs waiting for things to happen or for the core to arrive.

Like I said, I'd really like to see them be more aggressive in acquiring players via trades. I don't think FA in particular is a good cost/risk benefit most of the time. But they haven't really added much in the way of MLB players. When they have sold off guys of value they've generally done well with MLB returns. Marshall for Wood looks good. Feldman for Arrieta and Strop looks some what decent. Grimm has been good out of the pen this year.

 

[X]

Look, KBisBACK!!

 

[Boobaby1]

Look, KBisBACK!!

Thanks......Chris J!!

 

[patg006]

They platoon players when they shouldn't. They don't have revenue streams thanks to the neighborhood that is supposedly the reason the teams does so well financially, etc. I get it. I really do, but I think that discussion deserves its own thread.

Not enough revenue????

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

They are a top 5-6 revenue team in baseball.

 

[patg006]

How'd that go for the Royals over the past 20 years or the Mets the past 10 if you prefer a larger market team?

How has drafting in the top 10 for the majority of the last 20 years gone for the Royals??

According to most here, that is the magic recipe for success. Draft in the top 10 for a few years and then you will have long term success.

Facts say differently however.

Conversely, if you draft well/stockpile picks and don't add players via trade/FA you often end up just bad enough where you end up trading off assets like Beltran with the Royals because you're not competing with him.

The Royals traded Beltran because they couldn't pay him, not because they weren't competing. At least know what you are talking about for a change.

They also are an example of a team that hasn't had to spend in FA to acquire players because instead they've traded well. They brought in McGwire, Edmonds, Rolen and Holliday all via trades

Wrong again.

Yes they traded for Holliday but they also had to resign him as a FREE AGENT. He hit the open market, was available to sign with any team he wanted and the Cardinals had to pay him.

Sorry, but that is a textbook definition of a free agent.

They have also made very good FA signings with players like Lance Berkman, Carlos Beltran, Kyle Lohse and Chris Carpenter to name just a few.

 

[ThaGator]

My favorite thing about Theo is how he doesn't buckle under the pressure of crybaby fans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SilenceS]

My favorite thing about Theo is how he doesn't buckle under the pressure of crybaby fans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What? Theo isnt allowed to spend. That much is very, very clear. Im sure he could care less about fans with his 25 million dollar contract, but Tommy boy calls the "what he can spend" shots.

 

[diavolos]

What? Theo isnt allowed to spend. That much is very, very clear. Im sure he could care less about fans with his 25 million dollar contract, but Tommy boy calls the "what he can spend" shots.

and tommy sure ain't john henry.

 

[diavolos]

My favorite thing about Theo is how he doesn't buckle under the pressure of crybaby fans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

let me get this straight...now one is a "crybaby" if one wants his/her team to win?

 

[Parade_Rain]

Not enough revenue????

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

They are a top 5-6 revenue team in baseball.

I couldn't give 2 shits about any company's revenue as a stand alone...I want to know net profits, debt-to-asset ratios, etc.

 

[beckdawg]

I don't understand these comparisons at all. Wouldn't the Royals lack of success with their "suck on purpose, draft high" plan be a point AGAINST the Cubs? Wouldn't a better comparison be to the Hendry era Cubs...where they made multiple postseason appearances "despite" and average-to-poor farm system? Trade for other team's young players, get some good FAs, win games?

I was saying that diavolos' comment about not going to games or watching them on tv had 0 effect on those teams. Simply put, not showing up to games has very little to do with changing a franchise. If it did Miami would have changed their culture a long time ago.

 

[patg006]

I couldn't give 2 shits about any company's revenue as a stand alone...I want to know net profits, debt-to-asset ratios, etc.

Well you only mentioned revenue streams, which is why I responded about revenue.

I would imagine that the Cubs are doing just fine in whatever financial metric you want to use.

No one is listening to the Cubs are poor excuse.

 

[beckdawg]

Yeah, look at the Montreal Expos. Best team in baseball in 1994, fans don't want to pay top dollar going to dumpy stadium in terrible neighborhood...and now the franchise no longer exists! You're right...not showing up to games had no effect on the Expos.

It's not like the organization went out of business. They moved to Washington. Them not going to games didn't suddenly make the team spend more money. That's my point. You're not going to force the cubs to do anything by not going to games. They are going to do whatever the hell they want to regardless. If people feel the quality of the product isn't good enough to go watch that's fine. Don't spend your money on the team. But let's not act like you're some how changing what the cubs are going to do. Teams make more money in TV deals now than they do in actual attendance.

 

[patg006]

let me get this straight...now one is a "crybaby" if one wants his/her team to win?

Pretty much.

Apparently the only true Cub fans are the ones who think it is reasonable to throw away multiple seasons at the major league level waiting for this magical crop of prospects to produce multiple All Star players

 

[patg006]

It's not like the organization went out of business. They moved to Washington.

LOL!!!

They moved to Washington because if they had remained in Montreal the organization would have gone out of business.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Well you only mentioned revenue streams, which is why I responded about revenue.

I would imagine that the Cubs are doing just fine in whatever financial metric you want to use.

No one is listening to the Cubs are poor excuse.

I mentioned it, because that's what the Cubs mention (revenue streams). They aren't poor, but purchasing a club for $900 mil recently means they are carrying debt that they won't have in X amount of years. It does matter to those who are actually on the hook for the money.

 

[beckdawg]

Of course it doesn't. But thats not what you said. You said that fans not showing up has "no effect" on the franchise. It obviously does. I would guess that Matt Millen would have kept his job a bit longer in Detroit if they had full attendance at Lions games. I would think that fans staying away in droves would eventually force the demise of the current management.

Fair enough maybe my choice of words was wrong but that's not exactly what I meant. All I was trying to get at is boycotting the team doesn't really accomplish the goal of making the team spend more money. It could have no impact. It could cause the team to move. Or it could even cause them to be more conservative in their spending.